Peer Coaching in Higher Education: A case study of exemplary practice to demonstrate the impact on student grades Dr Jill Andreanoff
A Quick Poll of your understanding of Coaching & Mentoring……………………… Wi-fi Access : Eduroam or Click “ WiFi Guest ” This should prompt users to go to the login page. On this page click “Get Online at Sheffield Hallam University” . This will redirect users to sign-in/ create an account for Sky Wi-Fi . To respond to questions: Using your smartphone/browser : PollEv.com/jillandreano406 Text: JILLANDREANO406 to 22333 once to join and then A,B,C etc as per instructions (charged at usual text rate)
The Undisputed Success of Mentoring & Coaching Andrews et al (2011) Study of Peer Mentoring in 6 Higher Education Institutions ‘Peer mentoring works by addressing fears about settling in and making friends and making the student feel as though they belong. Griffin, 1995; Glaser, Hall and Halperin, 2006; Hill and Reddy, 2007) ‘Students who used the scheme reported higher levels of success in making the transition to University, were more likely to identify with the University community and found the program helpful. Recommendations ‘A dedicated team or individual should be in place to ensure a stringent recruitment process and a full training programme is offered’ Need for Clarity When Measuring Success Woodd (1997) ‘what is being measured or offered as an ingredient in success is not clearly conceptualised’. Gibson (2005) and Chao (2009) reproach others for not clarifying the precise definition of the support in their studies. Jacobi (1991) and D’Abate , Eddy and Tannenbaum (2003) report that the lack of clarity in the terms makes it difficult to compare and contrast the different interventions and determine whether they were successful or not IS COACHING THE BEST INTERVENTION TO MEET THE OBJECTIVES?
Exemplary Practice Provision: Stringent recruitment process in place including application form / interview - What qualities do you feel are required for successful coaching? - What skills/expertise do you have that will make you a successful coach? - What difficulties do you think the learners may bring to the coaching sessions? - Give an example of how you have used a coaching approach to support others. Thorough 2 day training programme culminating in an assessment - an introduction to the coaching programme objectives - the skills required for successful coaching - communication skills development (effective questioning, active listening, non-verbal cues) - action planning within the coaching context/ goal setting / giving and receiving feedback - implementation of coaching tools or models appropriate to context - record keeping and contracting (consider accreditation) Resources - Handbook to be used as a reminder of the training Toolkit designed specifically for the coaching objectives (academic attainment, well being…) - Contact Log – to record the context of the coaching sessions - Learning Log – to promote reflective practice -
Exemplary Practice Provision: Ementoring (including platform if appropriate) Appropriate training to identify the advantages – record of dialogue - - Highlight the challenges (needs more perseverance to engage, lack of flow in dialogue etc) - Tips for overcoming challenges Coachee Recruitment / Induction - Targeted and rigorous application process - Involvement in matching process using Coach Profiles (can include in training programme) Coaching Support Workshops - Themed to address common issues (lack of engagement, 3 strike rule, ‘visitor’ relationships) - Maintaining moment in the relationship, bringing the relationship to a close - Opportunity for further CPD - e.g. Solution Focused Approaches - Introduce more coaching tools (based on mid-way feedback) - Individual support (drop-ins or develop a self-supporting group) Evaluation Process - Based on coaching programme objectives – incorporate into coachee application form - Sander and Sanders Academic Behavioural Confidence Scale (pre and post coaching)
A Quick Poll of your thoughts on how much time is needed to coordinate a peer coaching programme ………… To respond: Using your smartphone/browser : PollEv.com/jillandreano406 Text: JILLANDREANO406 to 22333 once to join and then A,B,C etc as per instructions (charged at usual text rate)
Typical Number of Hours to Deliver a Programme TYPE OF NUMBER OF NUMBER OF COORDINATOR PROGRAMME MENTORS/COACHES MENTEES/COACHEES HOURS Peer Coaching for 90 160 500 over 35 weeks Undergraduates (15 hrs per week) 250 over 30 weeks Staff Coaching 18 24 (8 hrs per week) Alumni E-Mentoring 50 50 60 over 40 weeks (9 hrs per week) School Pupil 30 150 (in 5 schools) 600 over 20 weeks Mentoring (30 hrs per week) NB. Front Loaded Hours
Requirements to Measure Success - Kulik, Kulik and Shwalb (1983) ‘only 12% of studies are of acceptable methodological quality’ - Capstick (2004) & Medd (2012) call for studies of a more ‘quantitatively robust nature ’ Clear aims and objectives for intervention Be explicit about the process - a one to one or group intervention - pre-determined agenda or coachee led? - directive or non-directive approach / enquiry v advocacy - Knight (2007) - Coactive Coaching (involving the persons whole life) - Cognitive Coaching (based upon reflection) - expert or reciprocal model (Donegan, Ostrosky, Fowler, 2000) - duration of programme - frequency of meetings/sessions ‘Tell me and I' ll forget ; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll understand’
Conflicting Evidence Sim (2003) - findings suggested that peers are perceived by students as the least useful partners in learning when compared to tutors and lecturers. Bidgood, Jones, Hammond and Bithell (2010) - 3 year study of PAL programme reported improved social aspects of university life and satisfaction but little improvement with study skills or assignment preparation. (Horizontal strand) Kyllonen (2012) suggests that non-cognitive skills are as important for academic success as academic readiness Self-efficacy is the key to success (plus student engagement - Tinto) Richardson, Abraham, and Bond (2012) / McKenzie and Schweitzer (2001) Meta-analysis identified the strongest predictor of success was performance / academic self-efficacy Consistent with the meta-analysis conducted by Robbins, Lauver, Davis, Langley and Carlstrom (2004 ) Retention is best predicted by academic goals, academic self-efficacy and academic-related skills (true even after controlling for socioeconomic status, achievement test scores, and high school grades) (2013) Successful coaches realise that routinely taking on the role of an ‘expert with the answers’ is the wrong path toward collaboration and capacity building
Mentoring & Coaching Unit Examples Alumni Mentoring/Graduate Futures (improve employability of final year students) Disability Mentoring programme (Mental Health / Aspergers) Buddy Mentor Scheme (for international students to help with integration) Several school based programmes (formerly Aimhigher) – academic attainment… National Scholarship Programme Mentoring (for widening participation students) Leadership Coaching for Staff (improve well-being / resilience) - UH & UAL *Over 300 mentors/coaches recruited and trained every year - Supporting over 450 people Foundation Degree Mentoring (University of Durham) – prepare for BA/BSc study
Peer Coaching Aims & Objectives (case study): a 10-12 week intervention starting in January Aim: to improve academic attainment (initially Academic Mentoring) Objectives help students balance social and academic life help students to understand the requirements of their course provide one to one support and motivation to succeed guide students to better engage with and implement tutor feedback support students in preparing/planning for exams and assignments Definition: Peer Coaching A facilitative, goal focused relationship between a more experienced and less experienced student where the emphasis is on asking open questions, listening, negotiating targets to both empower and promote self-efficacy in the coachee. The coach would ideally refrain from advice-giving and the overall goal and agenda for the coaching sessions is set by the coachee. (based on Knight’s Cognitive Coaching model) ** The impact of peer coaching on the academic performance of undergraduate students: a mixed methods study (2015) The Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Jill Andreanoff
Methods adopted for evaluation: Mixed methodology (QUAN + QUAL) : Convergent parallel design using qualitative data to corroborate the quantitative findings Quantitative data - to reveal quantifiable evidence of any benefits from peer coaching (150) - transforming some qualitative data to quants (Likert scales) - use of control group for comparison of academic performance (93) Qualitative data - to reveal a deeper understanding of the quantitative data and process
Outcomes (perception data) Paired sample t-tests Mean increase from pre to post coaching : • 0.74 - satisfaction with academic progress (large effect size) • 0.74 - managing their course requirements (large effect size) • 0.53 - satisfaction with student life (moderate effect size)
Recommend
More recommend
